dofuswikifandomcom-20200223-history
Dofus:AdminChat
This page is meant as a WIP status talk center for admins. Article pages will be admin-only but viewable by all Wikians. Non-admin users can use the talk pages for any comments. In order to keep the page manageable, I suggest using it as a ToC, with links to subpages for specific topics. This page is meant as a central page for coordinating admin work. Except maybe at the early stages of brainstorming (relevancy discussion), larger projects do not belong here, but to the Dofus:Community Portal * Dofus:ToDo * Dofus:AdminChat/Template Deployment Structure of this page I was thinking more on like a talk page format, where we could discuss stuff and give approving votes and rejecting votes with comments on the situation and as a conditional the 3 votes must be casted positive or negative in order to the action. And as the discussions get resolve we can move them on an Archive page for history records of our decisions. But when i suggested the page i was more focus on projects as a way to include people to help and easy to see than various admin and users talk pages. The template development dont see much of a good idea if we follow the other path the reason i protected the pages was due to the "testings" and modifications been done to the key templates as every test what it did was more damaging than helping, also to avoid flames on the changes to the minimum and to created a more consensus conscience that modifications will be done but they must be request and must been agree before hand to their positiveness improve to the template --Cizagna (Talk) 05:15, 4 March 2007 (UTC) User:Fogleg Revert power On another topic, I suggest you use the new GiveRollback functionality to give User:Fogleg the rights of rolling back. He's been doing quite a lot of relevant reverts recently, so it might help and it's a way of recognizing his work. --Lirielle 11:57, 3 March 2007 (UTC) * approve --Cizagna (Talk) 05:15, 4 March 2007 (UTC) * approve seems like he'd find it useful. //PeetTM 12:46, 4 March 2007 (UTC) * approve --Lirielle 20:29, 7 March 2007 (UTC) Protection against forgemaging Avoiding forgemaging edits is a hard task. I suggest that, for well-known items (low or mid level, being around for a while...), we simply protect the pages and ask for changes to be suggested and commented on the talk page. (I've done so for the Gobball Gear (but not for the individual items).) If you agree, we could start protecting some pages but we need to document this through a warning on the main page. This could in theory mean more work for us (we would need to implement the changes ourselves), but it won't be so if we restrict the protection to well-established pages. Instead, we would avoid extra reverting work. --Lirielle 08:46, 8 March 2007 (UTC) * approve, with caution --Lirielle 08:48, 8 March 2007 (UTC) * approve. We should put some more info in the protected page notice too. //PeetTM 10:44, 8 March 2007 (UTC) :: MediaWiki:Protectedtext for users and MediaWiki:Protectedpagewarning for sysops //PeetTM 11:18, 8 March 2007 (UTC) * disagree. This looks like againts protection policy of wikipedia as it can be a Common mistake even thought i started with the Prespic Gear page im still waiting for extra cooldown to remove the protection of that page, as one of the rules of wikia "Wikia should remain publicly editable, and not protected. Pages may, however, be temporarily or permanently protected for legal reasons" and i don't considerate this so heavy need to keep permanently protected also this is subjective to peoples necessities, for like at the start every one was drooling to obtain higher reflecting prespic gear, now that reflection does not protect against damage like it use to they are using low level items like the gobball gear but then they will go to another gear like arachnee so then we will have to protect the pages also, as the ones that do this edits are relative new to the game, and eager to give their 2 cents to fix a miss information, but don't even read the warnings (like the ones Peet writed on the prespic gear). For that reason when i saw it was becomming constant i went and start manual reverts so i could put comments as looked like people where watching the pages as as soon as we revert they re-adding info, and if they had continue i would have use the temporal protection policy. But this is a democracy so we will work out that way, thought i disagree. I have been looking for protection templates and have seen various options, i will make the examples later on my sandboxes and we will choose which is the best for our needs, also i have think we can some reference to the items pages, the best place we have is the community page (but linking to that page is a nightmare), and i was thinking on creating a template that said like "Community page Certificate" that will direct to a page explaining whats a certificated page and why the info that is inside its considerate accurate and changes may considerate as vandals etc. --Cizagna (Talk) 14:51, 8 March 2007 (UTC) :I knew you'd say that, maybe because I knew you're right ;), though I never really meant to make it a global and permanent policy (hence the 'with caution' annotation). We'll continue to apply ad-hoc protections. --Lirielle 16:00, 8 March 2007 (UTC) :How about adding a visible template header or footer to well known pages? Maybe something like: The stats of this item/gear displayed below are well known and/or documented on the official community site. Please note that items with other values may exist due to Forgemaging. You are welcome to discuss this on the item/gear's Talk Page. Or something shorter =) :Linking to the community site would be ideal, but troublesome, as it's not always up. And like Cizagna says, getting the links to work in the first place is difficult (finding the item ids). //PeetTM 16:38, 8 March 2007 (UTC) Hot Topic page Besides the "Dofus:" project pages, I thought maybe we could have some sort of a "focus" page ("Hot Topic"?), where we could specifically call for wikian's contributions on particular pages for a particular period. A page asking volunteer wikians to concentrate on a particular improvement of the wiki. One example would be to focus during the next days on the Gobball Gear and ask everyone to try and confirm whether the stats have changed by dropping themselves these items. This page would be advertised on the main page. --Lirielle 16:00, 8 March 2007 (UTC) :This idea has relevance with one of my multiple ideas, but we currently dont have where to display it the main page all those links must go out to make space, but still have not figure how to take them out with out having a flaming spree from users as all those links makes it truly easy to access all that information, but its simply wrongly misplace now that the wikia is truly growing in community and we are requiring a more interlinking between pages. My idea of promotion was to start with the class for 1 month promotion, as i wanted to implement the guides proposal of fogled and badmrmojo. There would be only stat guides eg. Cra/Intelligence, Cra/Strength, Cra/Agility, Cra/Hybrid01, etc. the quantity of hybrids will be limited to lets say 5 per class. That would remove those "ubber super duper cizagnas dagger guide" name pages that hare barely any info. Once a new guide is posted a warning will have to be set on the page, and the user/Ip who post it to merge it to the proper stat page, and once a week has pass if it has not been merge info should be copy to the talk page of the corresponding guide with the section name as the page name and then the page delete. I just have not expose it as im still contemplating what to do with the hierarchy of our pages to proper linking resolve --Cizagna (Talk) 18:18, 8 March 2007 (UTC) Builds again Builds like the recent Enutrof/Chance/Fisherman continuously bring us back to the pitiful reality of build submissions. I guess Cizagna will point me once more to the universal rule of editability of the wikias, but I really wonder if there is no way to restrict things so that we don't get useless guides. It may well be that this specific guide will develop into something useful, but its is now restricted to low levels. I'd like to be sure that the guy is able to go further than that. Another point: do we really need to have one more Enu/Chance build, does this build only differ by its having the profession of fisherman (professions being without any impact on a build by itself?). There are many such questions and I know you must have thought about it thousands of times and that we have so many "priorities" to cope with, but it may be time to start some brainstorming about the problem(s). :Suggestion 1: Can we (=is it legitimate and desirable to) restrict build submissions to, say, registered user with a published user profile? I know, users can lie about their being eg. a lvl 125 Feca, but it could be a basic barrier against newbie builds. When I say restrict, I don't mean physically protecting the pages, but including in the Dofus charter the requirement of having published one's player profile to publish build on the Class pages. Builds not meeting this requirement could be moved to the user's User pages, with a link on the Class page under a warning heading ("The following builds have not been fully tested and/or are not complete" etc.) :Suggestion 2: Can you think of a way to manage variants without creating an endless list of "Ecaflip/Chance", "Ecaflip/Chance2", "Ecaflip/Chance my version" etc.? Can we for example add a charter rule stating that the author of the build must 'reasonably' demonstrate that his build is significally different from the original one to have it included on a separate subpage? If not, it would be included in a "Variants" section of the original build? Do we need to set up build naming rules? :I'm playing with the idea of publishing some king of Build template to streamline build creations and allow a quick insight into the builds, with the build starting with a summary of its main characteristics (eg. spells and stats at lvl 100) but, as usual, there are so many things to do. If you have ideas, fire away ;)... For a start, see here. All this is food for thought, all comments welcome --Lirielle 16:52, 16 March 2007 (UTC) :Built issues have been since i started here, and until we organize a ruling consensus there is no real solution. bla bla on the liberty of edit, bla bla on priorities (haha just to make it fast). :Now going to business braim storming is here thats the place i created, talk pages have an old conversations, like one of the people says, if you are higher level you may not even remember where did you level, what where you wearing, also depends on money and a little bit of luck from drops, moving to user pages its just moving the problem from one place to another, then what we will finish is with tons of guides in user pages, harder to find when we reach a consensus on how the guides should be appear and how the content should be. Also just a s a final comment most of the old guides are useless in terms of low level leveling because most of them depended on the prespic gear now nerf and other stuff.--Cizagna (Talk) 21:40, 21 March 2007 (UTC) :Started moving new builds to user pages when not elaborate :* Sram/Pure Agility ::approve --Lirielle 03:52, 21 March 2007 (UTC) ::approve --Peet 10:18, 21 March 2007 (UTC) ::abstain (neither approving or against, do as you guys see fit) --Cizagna (Talk) 21:40, 21 March 2007 (UTC) :The discussion you refer to on the portal is about class guides, which is not exactly the same, but the topics are of course interconnected. I have some ideas about build templates and/or rules, but let's move one step by step. :I think one starting point we have to agree upon is WHERE builds should go. The problem here is to make a difference between "personal builds" and "cooperative builds". Many a build starts from one's own opinion/idea/taste and many a submitter feels strongly about his build being edited by others. If so, his build is "personal" and belongs to his user page. I've started an "Experimental builds" page to make room for builds that IMHO should not be advertised on the class page, we could do the same for personal builds or mix both, I don't know. What matters here is that the class page is a community page and it's our job to make it usable and useful through reasonable housekeeping. :Before going any further, I'm therefore submitting to vote the following, which may sound obvious but is not really the current practice: ::Rule #1: All builds posted to (=linked from) the class page are submitted to the community and therefore editable by anyone. Submitters that want their build to remain personal are welcome to post it on there user page. A list of personal builds is maintained on the XXX page. ::Comment: obviously, it would be our job to make sure that the community edits improve the build while keeping to the original idea (say an Strength xelor should not be turned into an Agility xelor because many think a Strength build is not reasonable), but that's another point. We'll discuss our houseekeeping tasks if and when we agree on rule 1. :--Lirielle 10:32, 22 March 2007 (UTC) :: Class guides, leveling builds, template for guides, rules to apply are all in the same box to work out, even thought you go to a more specific thing, i have to agree any link to a user guide sadly falls in the community hands as people will see it from there and edit it with approval/rejection/feedback, where to put them... well like i told all those guides have to be trim down to stat based guides that will bring a huge reduction, variables will be put on the guide that relies more for example a sadida that its mostly str with vit will go on the Str guide as a subsection and depending on the content it has it may obtain its own page but link from the Str guide maybe a higly develop hybrid guide would be good to be link directly from the class page. Now about the feelings of other people there is a note at the bottom of each edit in the "please note If you don't want your writing to be edited mercilessly or redistributed by others, do not submit it." so there is a warning. I would prefer we move this discussion the the community page, as we are the ones that are going to enforce it but we are not the ones that are going to be doing all those modification or edits and its more easy for people to give ideas if they can edit the page where the discussion is been work out. --Cizagna (Talk) 02:12, 23 March 2007 (UTC) :::(Rule #1): Agree --Lirielle 10:32, 22 March 2007 (UTC) :::(Rule #1): Agree --Cizagna (Talk) 02:12, 23 March 2007 (UTC) User:Myriad Osamodas Str Guide I have consulted the Staff team to get some counseling trought the IRC channel, i already drop a proposal to her to make a copy of her original guide to her usernamespace so she and only she can edit it (well sysops can edit also but will not do), and give proper credits to her guide in the guide in the mainnamespace, lets see if she accepts it. In terms of legal rights we can drop the GFDL license and there is not much she can argue. But lets first value how useful is her guide? I have read it looks nice, and solid comments, but looks like an experimental field, little facts or raw data where one can grab from the guide only 1 weapon to choose not many places where to hunt with that build, as it depends on the critical mostly would it be worth to keep it or remove and wait for other person to try to fill later that gap with other ideas? possible more inovating --Cizagna (Talk) 17:33, 4 April 2007 (UTC) :Proposal to publish the guide on the user page was done the very first time that I jumped in, and we're still waiting for an argumented answer. As Catherine underlines, there's no need for js or css - we never allowed user main pages to be edited by other users did we? By coincidence(?), we've just discussed the public aspect of builds hereabove. :By another coincidence, I've just started working on streamlining builds, experimenting with Ecaflips for a start. So, to answer your question, I can't tell for now if the build has value or not (the more so that I don't play Osamodas), but it may well be that this build gets merged and depreciated when the streamlining time comes for Osamodas builds, based on experience from the Ecaflip round. If the community agrees with my approach, there will be one and only one Osamodas/Strength build, edited and improved by the community. --Lirielle 17:49, 4 April 2007 (UTC) Nope we have never allow except the user allows it (like the price guide of some one dont remember his name) just stating and confirming the obvious to the satisfaction of the user. The other well yes a deep guide review i cant do it, its more superficial her writing style is refreshing thought its personal and not canon type as we are resource of info but thats not new just evaluating the guide in terms of what it has and what is missing (as many of the guides have) about the steamlining we are trying to work out in my case i would not matter if we delete the guide as its vague more like pointing out as it looks its still in develop or improve, as its very rare the osamodas of STR and i know a few that buffed str lets see what Myriad decides and we will act accordingly. The summon guide i just saw it, its sort of redundant info also as that could be manage in the individual pages... --Cizagna (Talk) 18:03, 4 April 2007 (UTC) PVP guides :(maybe just another aspect of the discussion on builds) I suggest you have a look on Talk:Ecaflip PVP Strategy and throw in your 2 cents' worth. I decided to delete the "matchup" pages because they were too specific - we could have like 66 of them and we need to keep the wikia maintainable and manageable. Maybe a PVP section could be added to the new builds. BTW, I started making drastic changes to the way builds are organized and didn't get even one comment. Good or bad news?? --Lirielle 12:36, 24 April 2007 (UTC) * Aggree for PVP thing --Cizagna (Talk) 04:47, 27 April 2007 (UTC) :: I agree that PVP strategy should be part of a build, rather than a general page for each class. After all, your effectiveness in PVP is determind by your spells and stats, is it not? I vote we delete all PVP stuff, and include battle strategy in class builds. //PeetTM 10:21, 25 April 2007 (UTC) :: Also, nice work on the build oganisation. Looks good. //PeetTM 10:21, 25 April 2007 (UTC) :PVP strategy confuses me as even having the exact stat and spell build, gear kicks in and then trow allies and wow huge list... for me would be total delete but oh well people still will keep adding so yeah maybe concentrate every thing in class pages more like Ecaflip/PVP that way it follows the same pattern of class guides but PVP focus (in name aspects. :About the builds well i have not check as im trying to hijack a template from other wiki but has user protection so i will have to wait for me to get authorize ¬_¬, but so far its looks good and we have not get complains, at least its cleaning the class pages. --Cizagna (Talk) 04:47, 27 April 2007 (UTC) Rollback power suggestion I nominate PresqueVu for rollback powers. She's been using the undo feature for a while now, and has been good at reverting vandalism. //PeetTM 10:24, 25 April 2007 (UTC) :approve --Lirielle 03:52, 21 March 2007 (UTC) :approve She is been doing a good work (missing Your vote Peet) --Cizagna (Talk) 04:37, 27 April 2007 (UTC) :approve =) //PeetTM 08:10, 27 April 2007 (UTC) User pages Well we will be facing soon (like maybe in 6 or 9 months so no real rush) a new problem that is slowly growing and those are user pages. So it would be best if we start developing strategy on how to handle it i have explore some wikis to see their user policy, some of them are very tight the best one i found had that if users did not contribute to the wikia in around 1 week of the user page creation the page was deleted, and i like the idea, also i would like to add that if the user did not contribute for a period of 6 months the user page and all its subsequence pages should be deleted, that will help us to maintain cleaner of articles the wiki, now there are issues... A wiki mission is be a mostly cannon way of storage of information, by the help from a community, and adminship is granted to trusted people that are compromise bla bla bla bla, all the system it manages its to give proper credit to every ones edit, now whats the function of user pages, its to communicate with those people now some talk pages keep track of what the user has done good or bad and stuff so how do we handle that ethic part? im still trying to find a solution more satisfying but i want to know what are your ideas before i start moving more aggressively . --Cizagna (Talk) 21:25, 8 May 2007 (UTC) Dark Chest The Dark Chest page seems to have become a target for vandalism. I have protected it from editing by annonymous editors for now. //PeetTM 14:55, 19 May 2007 (UTC) :(1 month old answer xD)I was having so much fun with that page, i knew who was the vandal as he try various times until i gave a heavy warning and when you block he decide to use his user account so sad had to ban him as warned =/ and thought i could put the info visible for 2 weeks in the whole wiki hehehe. soon i will unblock the page any way but that page will may get vandalize again people are so greedy --Cizagna (Talk) 02:48, 24 June 2007 (UTC) Administration thoughts With the addition of GroundZero to the team and as the Equipment template implementation is approaching its end, I thought I should share a few considerations with you. ;This page: As Cizagna initially suggested, we could give this another form. Maybe a forum section dedicated to sysops? If you think it's appropriate would you mind creating one? --Lirielle 10:55, 11 September 2007 (UTC) :This has finish more like a village pump so its better to keep topic focus, what i mean is lets keep 1 topic per subject the more it covers a topic with different subjects the harder is to reach a clear consensus. :I dont aggree with a forum first forum are DPL list, so if you create a forum will be open to any one edits (how it should be in the first place) but why a special sysops forums? the issues that a sysops would manage will be more related to the community so at the end watercooler would be the proper place for those types of discussions. --Cizagna (Talk) 15:05, 21 September 2007 (UTC) ;Templates I'm nearly done with Equipments - except for the pics to be added and the Pet pages that I'm in the process of standardizing based on User:Lirielle/Pet Skeleton. The next step would be to update the Item templates (latest templates are Itembox3 and Resourcebox2, depending on whether the item has effects/conditions or not -- typical use of Itembox3 is for food.--Lirielle 10:55, 11 September 2007 (UTC) ;What comes next? * templates: Monster, NPC, locations (reviewing the Area/Subarea project)--Lirielle 10:55, 11 September 2007 (UTC) * Rifter's spell project seems to be lagging behind :/--Lirielle 10:55, 11 September 2007 (UTC) :Rifter's project lag behind long ago xD lets see if he manages to email me the stuff now (that he has send while i was writing this comment so once i get back from my vacations i will review it). --Cizagna (Talk) 15:05, 21 September 2007 (UTC) * can Cizagna give us a status report on the Portal project? Looks like a mess to me?--Lirielle 10:55, 11 September 2007 (UTC) :Portal seems to go wonderful(even thought for the nagging of the random feature) sadly a portal is not a project that can be handle properly by 1 or 2 persons idea inputs like it has been done. Like i said to oscardog, the item portal looks great the rest looks like clones they dont have a clear identity of their own. --Cizagna (Talk) 15:05, 21 September 2007 (UTC) * GroundZero seems to have quickly got into his new powers (patrolling...). Is there more to it or is he going to keep to his basic administration tasks (which wouldn't hurt, don't get me misunderstood, it's already plenty)?--Lirielle 10:55, 11 September 2007 (UTC) :Well seeing I'm not an expert when it comes to coding ( yet ^^ ), I think I'll stick to patrolling grafitti - spamming - vandalism, answering questions where possible, fixing ( broken ) links, images, general improvement of pages etc. Unless you have an other task for me? --GroundZzero Talk / Admin 12:22, 11 September 2007 (UTC) :As i told Oscardog in the Adminship request in other way even thought Peet has officially left he was quite inactive for a while before his announcement and we did not have a big problem. If we as admins create proper channels for users to report issues we would just have to resolve the issues instead of searching for them on of reasons of my final decision was that GroundZzero gave respect in different ways that i may make this huge just to list my reasons. Thought i hope he could patrol more deeply as we can see in his patrol log most are automatic. With time he will do what he is able, as same as Peet or Lirielle i never impose any duty their were more request from me to help me in something or in any case you guys approaching my projects as i go for example DoctorCZ he is very helpful the downside is he does not talk that much (or better say he does not talk) --Cizagna (Talk) 15:05, 21 September 2007 (UTC) ;Categorization We used to include main topic pages in their own category, ie. Monster is flagged with Category:Monster, etc. I don't think it is appropriate, since the Category:Monster page is more of a list of monsters, and Monster is not a monster per se. It would suffice to have a link to the Monster page in the (descriptive) content of the Category:Monster page. This may seem knit-picking, but consider this: if we use DPL eg. to auto-maintain the Bow page, we'll get Bow listed in the table, which is not approriate to me... --Lirielle 10:55, 11 September 2007 (UTC) :I support the old system as we use the sortkey |* in the category code so those pages are at the top of the listings, also the actual DPL has ways to remove pages, like for example if its necessary we could add a special category named Category:No AutoDPL so we just add that to the DPL code to ignore any article in that category, and because we use specialize DPL's for those listings (the one you are making example) happends what Tildar told in this articles talk page where because its not using the template is not listed. --Cizagna (Talk) 15:05, 21 September 2007 (UTC) Automation Automation is progressing thanks to Tildar's excellent DPL work. I have identified a few more areas where DPL would come in handy: * I'm adding a Set parameter to the weaponbox/equipmentbox of set items. The goal is to have the Set Items table of each set page automated. Currently, we are frequently dealing with discrepancies between set pages and their individual items. * Similarly, we could usefully make the Set page a huge automated table * Generic Weapon pages have been settled by Tildar. Equipment pages should follow (rings, amulets, etc.) * A project I had with Semantic Mediawiki and which is continuously postponed is automating the "used in the craft of" section. Since there is only 1 recipe per item, we might use DPL in the following way: :* On each crafted item page, replace the current "crafted by" section with a template using the following fields: Profession, Level, Hidden, Ingredient1, IngredientNumber1, Ingredient2, IngredientNumber2, Ingredient3, IngredientNumber3, Ingredient4, IngredientNumber4, Ingredient5, IngredientNumber5, Ingredient6, IngredientNumber6, Ingredient7, IngredientNumber7, Ingredient8, IngredientNumber8 :* On each crafted item page, use DPL and the above template fields to generate the 'used in the craft of' section * An other area that could be automated are the (profession)/crafting pages, which are also manually maintained lists. * Possibly, drops could also be automated in some way. But as it is a many-to-many relation, I think we need to wait for Semantic Mediawiki * There are other lists that might use DPL but are not a priority (eg. Class Spells, monster spells...). Priority is on equipment items as wikians often edit effects in one place and not synchronizing with other pages (indibidual items, individual set pages, Set page, Profession/Crafting pages, equipment lists...) --Lirielle 11:30, 15 September 2007 (UTC) Effects of new sets Various effects are listed on our pages differently from the actual IG description. I suggest we do the same to: * reduce the length of the effects for the new sets * bring some uniformity among them * bring uniformity with all other effects The trick would be to use the same format as for other effects, with the name of the spell prefixed, like this: : * spell name: effect This format is compact and avoids potential discussions on the prepositions to use (to/for/on...). For example: : * Reduces by 1 AP the cost of Unsummoning Trap :* +30 to Critical Hits on Deceitful Attack :* Increases by 3 the range of Tricky Trap :* Reduces by 1 the recasting delay of Invisibility Would be transcribed as: : * Unsummoning Trap: -1 AP :* Deceitful Attack: +30 Critical hit :* Tricky Trap: +3 Range :* Invisibility: -1 Cooldown As a side effect, this brings the effect to the end of the sentence, thus avoiding the problem we have with automatic embedded icons when it's in the middle. --Lirielle 09:35, 15 October 2007 (UTC) :What other effects aside the class sets we have with this format? --Cizagna (Talk) 15:38, 20 October 2007 (UTC) * approve --Lirielle 10:07, 15 October 2007 (UTC) (pending comments) * postpone --Cizagna (Talk) 15:38, 20 October 2007 (UTC)